About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
majority leader harry reid had to switch his vote to know to bring the vote back up again after the senate comes back from recess. you have a lot of republican senators who said as recently as last week that they did not want to see the choice filibuster. even if they wanted to vote no, he at least deserved an uptown vote to be approved. there was no precedent -- precedent to filibuster president's choice like this. the republicans decided they wanted to try to use this vote as a way to extract more information from the white house on the issues like the terrorist attack on benghazi in september. they submitted to passing hagel when they come back. it way you're looking at, is delaying the inevitable. chuck hagel will be confirmed as defense secretary. he is just going to get to wait 11 days. to me, it seems like you should confirm him, because you're going to confirm him anyway. it is just another delay in what the senate is trying to do. harry reid set a new vote for tuesday, in 11 days. what do republicans want to see in the meantime? guest: they say they would like answers again from t
with the nra is harry reid. i don't know if he's still a member, he was a member at one point. i wonder if you characterize the nra relationship with harry reid own the years and also talk about what you have communicated about over the past few weeks with the man who will decide on whether a gun restriction law is bill is brought to the floor of the senate. >> i'm not our lobbyist. any recent conversations with senator reid would not be really within my -- i have not personally talked to senator reid. we had a relatively friendly relationship with the senator over time. we did not endorse him for re-election. we didn't endorse his opponent either. we supported him at the primary level last time. he has been, when firearms legislation has not been the priority of his president, he's a partisan leader, she's been responsive to constituents in nevada and has been relatively friendly on second amendment issues. he's under incredible pressure right now. he's got, as any member of congress or senator does, he has his own beliefs. he has the views and the demands of his constituents on the one hand,
but surely deteriorate, the american people will intensify pressure on harry reid's senate to finally do its job. americans are suffering, shall defense is suffering, the suffering of americans is not in recess during this crisis. congress should not be in recess either. we signed up to do a job and that job is not done. the house must provide leadership and prove we are serious about doing the people's business, and washington is where the people's business is done. given the magnitude of the risk and damage done by sequestration to america on a daily basis, i respectfully request that the house remain in session and do our jobs on each and every work day until sequestration is resolved. the path -- the house has passed numerous sequestration solutions. it is long past time for the senate to wake from its slumber, respond to the clairian call and pass a sequestration solution. mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new mexico, mr. lujan, for five minutes. mr. lujan: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend.
for communist intill stration, senator mccarthy tried to discredit state department employee reid harris, insinuating his choice of legal representative 20 years earlier made him suspect. let's listen. >> civil liberties union provide you with an attorney at that time? >> i had money offers of attorneys and one was from the american civil liberties union, yes. >> the question is did the civil liberties union supply you with an attorney? >> they did supply an attorney. >> the answer is yes? >> the answer is yes. >> you know the civil liberties union has been listed for a front and doing work for the communist party? >> mr. chairman this was 193 2. >> i know it was in 1932. >> do you know they since have been listed as a front for doing work of the communist party? >> i do not know they have been listed so sir. >> you do not know. >> i have heard that mentioned or read that mentioned. >> we see similarities in these two senators. joining me is "the washington post" nia malika henderson and writing for the dallas morning news, wayne slater also the author of "bush's brain." i saw it this we
has a proposal. i don't think it's sound, but let's vote on it. to harry reid, the house, we have done nothing in the senate. it is one thing to be the world's most deliberate body. it is another thing to be the most absent. we are not doing anything in the senate, so harry reid, please come up with one of your own proposals, put it on the floor, let's start voting. if you don't like what we are doing, come up with your own plan. now, as john said, republicans own this proposal on the sequestration idea. it was the president's idea, according to bob woodward broke, that we would agree to it. we got in this mess together, and we are going to have to get out the way and do it together. you are the commander in chief. do you really want a deal to destroy the military at the time we need it the most? you want to do that with asia? what about the low number of ships we have? if you exempt personnel, have you modernize the f16 and f18. our enemies would love this to happen. i am sure that iran is very supportive of sequestration. i am sure that al qaeda training camps all over the world woul
have barack obama who is a democrat, president of the united states. then we have harry reid who is the majority leader. so the democrats are in control of both. now, if you think back at what happened back in -- during the last bush administration, we had exactly the reverse. george bush was president of the united states and the democrats were a minority. same situation. so what happened? first of all, we had bolton come up, john bolton. same thing, subjected to a 60-vote margin. we had steve -- dirk kempthorne. all remember dirk kempthorne. there are a lot of people who did not approve of him. he was appointed by bush, a republican, and then when he came over here, the democrats didn't like him, they subjected him to a 60-vote margin. that wasn't a filibuster. this isn't a filibuster today. people are trying to say that and blame me as being the bad guy that's causing a filibuster. it's not the case at all. any more than it was the case back in the 2005-2006 and other times when we had a nominee that was put forth by president bush. it was objected to by the democrats. now, di
's the interesting thing. if you look today we have barack obama, democrat president of the united states. and harry reid the majority leader. and the democrats are in control of both. if you think back at what happened back in during the last bush administration, we had exactly the reverse. george bush was president of the united states, and the democrats were the minority. same situation. so what happened? first of all, we had both come up. john bolton same thing. subjected to a 60-vote margin. we had steve -- we remember dirk, there a lot of people that it not approve of him. he was appointed by bush, a republican, and then when he came over here the democrats didn't like him. they subjected him to a 60-vote margin. that wasn't a filibuster. it's not a filibuster today. people are trying to blame me the bad guy causing a filibuster. it's not the case at all. it anymore the case than the 2005, 2006, and other times when we had a nominee put forth by president wush who was objected to by the democrat. dirk when he was nominated to be the secretary of entire job, there was a lot of opposition to the
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)